My understanding of Taoism strikes me very much as if it's IP... Don't fight the inevitable, don't make things overly complicated, the simple life is best, etc. This is based on reading the Tao Te Ching and the Tao of Pooh. Edit: I can't vouch for the Chang Tzu stuff - it's possible the religion is conveyed differently in different texts.

Originally Posted by Logos

Holy mud-wrestling bipolar donkeys, Batman!

Retired from posting and drawing Social Security. E-mail or PM to contact.

5. Fact: Taoism is a materialist monist tradition, existance is considered merely the transformation of material things. This is explicitly stated in the Chuang Tzu.

Correct. This is an important point and one of the main reasons why Taoism is more related to Cynicism than to Stoicism. It is illustrates why Taoism is similar in spirit to the early materialists in Western philosophy, for example Democritus. It also gives us a key to understanding it in a Socionics perspective, because the whole empiricist tradition in Western philosophy can be traced back to the materialists. The empiricist tradition is , in contrast to the tradition I have been talking about before (Leibniz, Kant, etc.).

More can be said about this, but it all suggests that captures the essence of early Taoist philosophy better than other possible "typings".

But Salawa's listing of why this is an IP philosophy reflects more closely an IJ temperament.

Actually no. Let's compare them:

Salawa (correctly) listed these Taoist themes:

Conserving energy

Acting only when necessary, knowing when to act

Wu Wei -- acting without expending energy unnecessarily (roughly!)

Taking a passive, purely reactive stance in relation to the universe (this implies an assumption that the universe is Dynamic, else a reactive stance isn't really necessary)

You responded by listing typical IJ characteristics:

calm, balanced and inert

"unflappable"

rigid but not very fast gait

may appear passive-aggressive

usually very stable mood

more reactive than active

little inclination to fidget during long periods of inactivity

The IP and the IJ temperaments are similar in many respects, but the bolded part in Salawa's list is inconsistent with the IJ temperament, and the bolded parts in your IJ list are inconsistent with the IP temperament.

How is the "Taking a passive, purely reactive stance in relation to the universe" in Salawa's list inconsistent with the IJ's "more reactive than active" point?

Because even though IJs in general may be slightly more reactive than proactive, IJs don't take a passive, purely reactive stance in relation to the universe. Unlike IPs, IJs are not passive observers in the way the dominants are described in Socionics. (A good example is Dmitri Lytov's introduction to Socionics.)

My understanding of Taoism strikes me very much as if it's IP... Don't fight the inevitable, don't make things overly complicated, the simple life is best, etc. This is based on reading the Tao Te Ching and the Tao of Pooh. Edit: I can't vouch for the Chang Tzu stuff - it's possible the religion is conveyed differently in different texts.

From what hkkmr is saying though, there seems to be a huge misconception of Taoism, so IP may not be the most accurate representation of the philosophy.

Originally Posted by Phaedrus

Correct. This is an important point and one of the main reasons why Taoism is more related to Cynicism than to Stoicism. It is illustrates why Taoism is similar in spirit to the early materialists in Western philosophy, for example Democritus. It also gives us a key to understanding it in a Socionics perspective, because the whole empiricist tradition in Western philosophy can be traced back to the materialists. The empiricist tradition is , in contrast to the tradition I have been talking about before (Leibniz, Kant, etc.).

More can be said about this, but it all suggests that captures the essence of early Taoist philosophy better than other possible "typings".

Spinoza (a card-carrying member of the Rationalist tradition) has more in common with Taoism and the Pre-Socratic thinkers than the Empiricists.

Originally Posted by Phaedrus

Because even though IJs in general may be slightly more reactive than proactive, IJs don't take a passive, purely reactive stance in relation to the universe. Unlike IPs, IJs are not passive observers in the way the dominants are described in Socionics. (A good example is Dmitri Lytov's introduction to Socionics.)

In which case, Salawa's points here go better with the IJ temperament as they indicate a leading rational element:

Acting only when necessary, knowing when to act

Wu Wei -- acting without expending energy unnecessarily (roughly!)

When compared with the IP list of traits, we can see that action or foreknowledge of action or acting to conserve energy is not really conveyed anywhere in the list:

relaxed

go-with-the-flow

finds it easy to spend long periods of time in no activity, or at very low levels of energy

movements are flexible, unhurried

little inclination towards fidgetiness when having to remain inactive for longer periods

"Alpha Quadra subforum. You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious." ~Obi-Wan Kenobi

Spinoza (a card-carrying member of the Rationalist tradition) has more in common with Taoism and the Pre-Socratic thinkers than the Empiricists.

In what way? And do you have an example of what you have in mind?

Originally Posted by Logos

In which case, Salawa's points here go better with the IJ temperament as they indicate a leading rational element:

Acting only when necessary, knowing when to act

Wu Wei -- acting without expending energy unnecessarily (roughly!)

It is a typical, defining characteristic of leading types that they know when to act. The same thing cannot be said bout IJs. If you haven't read Lytov's introduction, now is certainly the time to do it. And it is true of both IPs and IJs that they act only when necessary, and that they don't want to expend energy unnecessarily. So, it's only fully consistent with the IP temperament.

Originally Posted by hkkmr

In a way Taoism is a criticism of rationality, but that would be using distinctions I'm not willing to make with certainty.

That's true and another argument against the thesis that Taoism is correlated with rationality in Socionics. And we don't need to debate whether the described themes are really Taoist or not. The point is that they are clearly more IP than IJ.

The metaphysical system in place. That's all I am going to say about it at this time.

It is a typical, defining characteristic of leading types that they know when to act. The same thing cannot be said bout IJs. If you haven't read Lytov's introduction, now is certainly the time to do it. And it is true of both IPs and IJs that they act only when necessary, and that they don't want to expend energy unnecessarily. So, it's only fully consistent with the IP temperament.

Read hkkmr's refutation of this from the Taoist perspective.

That's true and another argument against the thesis that Taoism is correlated with rationality in Socionics. And we don't need to debate whether the described themes are really Taoist or not. The point is that they are clearly more IP than IJ.

And my point is that Salawa's list was bogus as it was more indicative of IJ and not Taoist in general.

"Alpha Quadra subforum. You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious." ~Obi-Wan Kenobi

I have. Did you read my comment on that in my last post? And do you notice that what hkkmr says strengthens my position and almost falisifies your IJ thesis once and for all? IJ temperament is more about conserving energy than the IP temperament, even it, to some extent, can be said of both of them. There is no good argument for the claim that Taoism is IJ. Only the IP temperament is consistent with Taoism.

Originally Posted by Logos

And my point is that Salawa's list was bogus as it was more indicative of IJ and not Taoist in general.

I thought I had proven to you that you are wrong about that. Check the references. It is obvious from the Socionics literature that Salawa's list is not indicative of IJ but of IP. Read the Socionics material, for God's sake. You have an incorrect understanding of both the IJ and the IP temperaments.

How is the "Taking a passive, purely reactive stance in relation to the universe" in Salawa's list inconsistent with the IJ's "more reactive than active" point?

My understanding is: IJs are uncomfortable with change - they dislike it and want to avoid it for the most part. Taoism is at least in part about welcoming change, going along with it without resistance (but not actively changing things from what I've read - that's what's incompatible with EP).

I still think Taoism resembles IP, but it could be adapted to fit other similar temperaments with slightly different interpretations.

Originally Posted by Logos

Holy mud-wrestling bipolar donkeys, Batman!

Retired from posting and drawing Social Security. E-mail or PM to contact.

I have. Did you read my comment on that in my last post? And do you notice that what hkkmr says strengthens my position and almost falisifies your IJ thesis once and for all? IJ temperament is more about conserving energy than the IP temperament, even it, to some extent, can be said of both of them. There is no good argument for the claim that Taoism is IJ. Only the IP temperament is consistent with Taoism.

Except: I NEVER HAD A IJ THESIS FOR TAOISM!

I thought I had proved to you that you are wrong about that. Check the references. It is obvious from the Socionics literature that Salawa's list is not indicative of IJ but of IP. Read the Socionics material, for God's sake. You have an incorrect understanding of both the IJ and the IP temperaments.

Not really.

Originally Posted by Elro

My understanding is: IJs are uncomfortable with change - they dislike it and want to avoid it for the most part. Taoism is at least in part about welcoming change, going along with it without resistance (but not actively changing things from what I've read - that's what's incompatible with EP).

I still think Taoism resembles IP, but it could be adapted to fit other similar temperaments with slightly different interpretations.

Not as much from what hkkmr was saying though despite the SEI and IEI being in his "integral Taoist quadra."

"Alpha Quadra subforum. You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious." ~Obi-Wan Kenobi

Why? What have made you change your mind? Why do you now think that Pirsig is not an ISTp? The arguments here are more interesting than our opinions.

Pirsig's ideas sort of reminded me of Paulo Coelho's. Moreover, he VIs like him. Pirsig definitely has a Te ego, and after reading the wikiquote entry about him, I believe that he is Ni>Si:

-You look at where you're going and where you are and it never makes sense, but then you look back at where you've been and a pattern seems to emerge. And if you project forward from that pattern, then sometimes you can come up with something.

-It took me more than a week to deduce from the evidence around me that everything before my waking up was a dream and everything afterward was reality. There was no basis for distinguishing the two other than the growing pile of new events that seemed to argue against the drunk experience. Little things appeared, like the locked door, the outside of which I could never remember seeing. And a slip of paper from the probate court telling me that some person was committed as insane. Did they mean me?

-I've noticed that people who have never worked with steel have trouble seeing this... that the motorcycle is primarily a mental phenomenon. They associate metal with given shapes... pipes, rods, girders, tools, parts... all of them fixed and inviolable, and think of it as primarily physical. But a person who does machining or foundry work or forge work or welding sees "steel" as having no shape at all. Steel can be any shape you want if you are skilled enough, and any shape but the one you want if you are not.

Yes, I claim that it is a fact that Salawa's list describes the IP temperament and only to a lesser extent the IJ temperament. Do you claim that it is a fact that it is not a fact? Or do you simply don't know what to think?

Originally Posted by Logos

What can I say? I love basting in my own ignorance and stupidity.

So I know what I'm talking about, whereas you don't know what you're talking about. I don't think that's fair. You should also know what you're talking about, and the only way to make that happen is for you to study the Socionics material on temperaments, types, etc.

Originally Posted by Logos

You shouldn't since I'm a merry type.

Okay, you admit that you were wrong, and that's fair enough. But you are confirming my point, and that's more depressing than satisfying.

Yes, I claim that it is a fact that Salawa's list describes the IP temperament and only to a lesser extent the IJ temperament. Do you claim that it is a fact that it is not a fact? Or do you simply don't know what to think?

Could you tell me what to think, please?

So I know what I'm talking about, whereas you don't know what you're talking about. I don't think that's fair. You should also know what you're talking about, and the only way to make that happen is for you to study the Socionics material on temperaments, types, etc.

I refuse.

Okay, you admit that you were wrong, and that's fair enough. But you are confirming my point, and that's more depressing than satisfying.

And now you are putting words into my mouth.

Maybe. But it is good that we now agree that Taoism is IP, not IJ.

I have said nothing of the sort.

"Alpha Quadra subforum. You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious." ~Obi-Wan Kenobi

One of the reasons why I am curious about this is that the goal of Taoism is essentially to obtain a state of being in relation to the world and whether or not this relates to statics and dynamics..

Fields > Objects.

To be flexible and mindful to the ways of the world in order to be in harmony with it is Dynamic.

This is probably why multiple people will say that Taoism is reflective of an IP temperament.

Projection is ordinary. Person A projects at person B, hoping tovalidate something about person A by the response of person B. However, person B, not wanting to be an obejct of someone elses ego and guarding against existential terror constructs a personality which protects his ego and maintain a certain sense of a robust and real self that is different and separate from person A. Sadly, this robust and real self, cut off by defenses of character from the rest of the world, is quite vulnerable and fragile given that it is imaginary and propped up through external feed back. Person B is dimly aware of this and defends against it all the more, even desperately projecting his anxieties back onto person A, with the hope of shoring up his ego with salubrious validation. All of this happens without A or B acknowledging it, of course. Because to face up to it consciously is shocking, in that this is all anybody is doing or can do and it seems absurd when you realize how pathetic it is.

I agree. Taoism in general seems more Delta oriented. Yang Zhu one of the early precursors to Taoism I believe was SLI as well. He was considered a hedonist, early proponent of egoism, and epicurean which fits Delta particularly SLI philosophy. The only surviving material from him is in a book called Yang Zhu's "garden of pleasure"—http://www.sacred-texts.com/tao/ycgp/index.htm

I thought Lao Tzu was one of those few Infinite souls and therefore untypable.

Is that from soul types?

The Infinite Soul is a representative of the tao itself. A reunited cadre or cadres serve to “channel” a specific aspect of the tao (truth, love or energy) through a representative fragment to the Earth, in order to catalyze a spiritual transformation in the totality of sentience.

The Mitchell translation is good, but it is more of a reinterpretation of Mitchell's own ideas of the Daoist concepts.

Red Pine has a very poetic, rooted translation which is accurate to some of the source material we have. (it is supposedly very tricky to accurately create a semantic bridge between ancient chinese and modern day languages.)

The Mitchell translation is good, but it is more of a reinterpretation of Mitchell's own ideas of the Daoist concepts.

Red Pine has a very poetic, rooted translation which is accurate to some of the source material we have. (it is supposedly very tricky to accurately create a semantic bridge between ancient chinese and modern day languages.)

The Guru observes the net
but trusts his inner vision.
He allows things to come and go.
His heart is as open as the ether.
::::::::::::::
17
::::::::::::::
When the Guru administers, the users
are hardly aware that he exists.
Next best is a sysop who is loved.
Next, one who is feared.
And worst, one who is despised.

If you don't trust the users,
you make them untrustworthy.

The Guru doesn't talk, he hacks.
When his work is done,
the users say, "Amazing:
we implemented it, all by ourselves!"
::::::::::::::
19
::::::::::::::
Throw away documentation and manuals,
and users will be a hundred times happier.
Throw away privileges and quotas,
and users will do the Right Thing.
Throw away proprietary and site licenses,
and there won't be any pirating.

If these three aren't enough,
just stay at your home directory
and let all processes take their course.
::::::::::::::
75
::::::::::::::
When license fees are too high,
users do things by hand.
When the management is too intrusive,
users lose their spirit.